(03-03-2018 06:07 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Endorsements fine. That would make things interesting in the non-revenue sports.

If the NCAA is going to go with the endorsement model it needs to the stop requiring grants in aid for the student athletes. Give them 10k graduate student stipends but let them earn their way through school like everyone else.

Could be better for the universities overall.

Of course the 70k seater programs want all of the attention and exposure to be on the football stadium instead of endorsements for the swim team.

(03-03-2018 06:07 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Endorsements fine. That would make things interesting in the non-revenue sports.

If the NCAA is going to go with the endorsement model it needs to the stop requiring grants in aid for the student athletes. Give them 10k graduate student stipends but let them earn their way through school like everyone else.

Could be better for the universities overall.

Of course the 70k seater programs want all of the attention and exposure to be on the football stadium instead of endorsements for the swim team.

(03-03-2018 06:32 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-03-2018 06:07 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Endorsements fine. That would make things interesting in the non-revenue sports.

If the NCAA is going to go with the endorsement model it needs to the stop requiring grants in aid for the student athletes. Give them 10k graduate student stipends but let them earn their way through school like everyone else.

Could be better for the universities overall.

Of course the 70k seater programs want all of the attention and exposure to be on the football stadium instead of endorsements for the swim team.

The problem is its easy for this "endorsement/name and likeness" thing to essentially morph into buying players. Lets say, Phil Knight at Nike decides to give every Oregon player a nice $100K "endorsement" deal. Maybe a local car dealership in Alabama is suddenly struck by the belief that Crimson Tide players and recruits would help sell cars. Its not hard to see how this could escalate quickly. The landscape differs somewhat from olympic sports.

(03-03-2018 06:32 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-03-2018 06:07 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Endorsements fine. That would make things interesting in the non-revenue sports.

If the NCAA is going to go with the endorsement model it needs to the stop requiring grants in aid for the student athletes. Give them 10k graduate student stipends but let them earn their way through school like everyone else.

Could be better for the universities overall.

Of course the 70k seater programs want all of the attention and exposure to be on the football stadium instead of endorsements for the swim team.

The problem is its easy for this "endorsement/name and likeness" thing to essentially morph into buying players. Lets say, Phil Knight at Nike decides to give every Oregon player a nice $100K "endorsement" deal. Maybe a local car dealership in Alabama is suddenly struck by the belief that Crimson Tide players and recruits would help sell cars. Its not hard to see how this could escalate quickly. The landscape differs somewhat from olympic sports.

(03-03-2018 07:56 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-03-2018 06:32 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-03-2018 06:07 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Endorsements fine. That would make things interesting in the non-revenue sports.

If the NCAA is going to go with the endorsement model it needs to the stop requiring grants in aid for the student athletes. Give them 10k graduate student stipends but let them earn their way through school like everyone else.

Could be better for the universities overall.

Of course the 70k seater programs want all of the attention and exposure to be on the football stadium instead of endorsements for the swim team.

The problem is its easy for this "endorsement/name and likeness" thing to essentially morph into buying players. Lets say, Phil Knight at Nike decides to give every Oregon player a nice $100K "endorsement" deal. Maybe a local car dealership in Alabama is suddenly struck by the belief that Crimson Tide players and recruits would help sell cars. Its not hard to see how this could escalate quickly. The landscape differs somewhat from olympic sports.

Even more, it's hard to see how this would not escalate quickly. The so called "Olympic Model" works best for Olympic sports. But it isn't even used by the Olympics for team sports like basketball and hockey. There, the players are purely and thoroughly professional.

(03-04-2018 02:21 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  There isn’t any significant legitimate market for endorsement money but for a limited set of stars. There are plenty of major sport pro athletes who make nothing or a nominal sum.
Now if we are talking about say EA Sports or someone offering a video game with real players and every player getting a payment, I’m fine with that.
But 4 Star being offered $100,000 from Bobs Used Carplex in Tuscaloosa after he signs with Bama? I ain’t buying that as a legitimate payment tied to the guy’s advertising value.
Right now if you play baseball, soccer, track, golf, tennis, or ski and you think you have endorsement value the answer is simple, go pro.
If you play basketball you can go pro overseas or play in a minor league.
Football is the only sport where the star 18 and 19 year old has no option.

(03-03-2018 06:32 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-03-2018 06:07 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Endorsements fine. That would make things interesting in the non-revenue sports.

If the NCAA is going to go with the endorsement model it needs to the stop requiring grants in aid for the student athletes. Give them 10k graduate student stipends but let them earn their way through school like everyone else.

Could be better for the universities overall.

Of course the 70k seater programs want all of the attention and exposure to be on the football stadium instead of endorsements for the swim team.

The problem is its easy for this "endorsement/name and likeness" thing to essentially morph into buying players. Lets say, Phil Knight at Nike decides to give every Oregon player a nice $100K "endorsement" deal. Maybe a local car dealership in Alabama is suddenly struck by the belief that Crimson Tide players and recruits would help sell cars. Its not hard to see how this could escalate quickly. The landscape differs somewhat from olympic sports.

(03-03-2018 06:32 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-03-2018 06:07 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Endorsements fine. That would make things interesting in the non-revenue sports.

If the NCAA is going to go with the endorsement model it needs to the stop requiring grants in aid for the student athletes. Give them 10k graduate student stipends but let them earn their way through school like everyone else.

Could be better for the universities overall.

Of course the 70k seater programs want all of the attention and exposure to be on the football stadium instead of endorsements for the swim team.

The problem is its easy for this "endorsement/name and likeness" thing to essentially morph into buying players. Lets say, Phil Knight at Nike decides to give every Oregon player a nice $100K "endorsement" deal. Maybe a local car dealership in Alabama is suddenly struck by the belief that Crimson Tide players and recruits would help sell cars. Its not hard to see how this could escalate quickly. The landscape differs somewhat from olympic sports.

(03-04-2018 12:14 PM)Section 200 Wrote:  I like it because at least its honest. Instead of having players deal with shady folks, put all the deals out in the open. Sunshine is the best disinfectant.

(03-04-2018 12:36 PM)bgwisc Wrote:  If people are willing to admit that the recent basketball "revelations" are rampant across the NCAA, especially within the huge revenue generating sports of basketball & football, than any change to bring sunlight to these deals and end the hypocrisy of the "amateurism" model should be welcome.

The financial stakes are too high for sneaker companies, coaches, boosters, agents, and others not to use cash to help curry favor in landing an athlete. The options going-forward are to either de-emphasize sports to take the stakes (money) down, pretend the current system is working and make no changes, OR allow athletes some sort of revenue stream so that they can also benefit from the fruits of their labor. There are lots of ways to address the issue (i'm partial to a system where players have something equivalent to the NFLPA collectively bargaining for them, agreeing to some broad revenue split and having the proceeds placed in trust funds for players to be accessed once eligibility has been exhausted or they go to the next level) but reading these comments, it feels like a lot of the pushback is driven by fans of G5 teams who believe this will tilt the playing field. My question to them however is isn't the playing field already wildly tilted?

Money will find it's way to players in a system with this much money at stake, I'll never believe otherwise. The thing we need to figure out is how do we create a more transparent, less exploitative system that helps both athletes and universities continue to grow the pie. Sports aren't bad and money certainly isn't bad but the amateurism model flat out doesn't work in this environment, its a farce.